Trump Criminal Contempt Proceedings Resume

Summary

---

Legal AF by MeidasTouch – "Trump Criminal Contempt Proceedings Resume"

Host: Michael Popok (with commentary/quotes from Kristi Noem, Emil Bovey, Judge J. Michael Ludig)
Release Date: June 24, 2026

Episode Overview

In this detailed episode, Michael Popok breaks down the escalating legal saga surrounding potential criminal contempt charges against the Trump administration and Department of Homeland Security officials, notably Kristi Noem. The focus centers on a pivotal ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which has agreed to review whether a federal judge was correct in finding probable cause for contempt proceedings. The episode weaves in the extraordinary activism of 174 former judges—led by Judge J. Michael Ludig—who filed an influential amicus brief supporting the judiciary's inherent power.

The discussion also highlights legal developments concerning the separation of church and state, featuring a segment on a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Throughout, Popok underlines the significance of judicial independence, accountability, and the rule of law amidst political pressures.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Criminal Contempt Proceedings Against Trump Officials

• Background: Judge Boasberg found probable cause that members of the Trump administration, specifically Kristi Noem and certain DOJ officials, violated federal court orders related to deportations and treatment of detainees.
• Significance: Criminal contempt means “somebody’s going to jail” (02:29, Popok). The stakes are high as court authority and governmental accountability are at risk.

"That’s the top line. But what is the prime mover? 174 former judges...yoked together by our friend J. Michael Ludig...argue to the panel successfully that Judge Boasberg was right, that the inherent power of a federal judge cannot be disturbed."
— Michael Popok (03:13)

• Trigger Event: Federal officials ignored a restraining order, deporting detainees to an El Salvador prison (Seacop) in the dead of night, prompting emergency hearings.

---

2. Role of Kristi Noem & DOJ: Orders Defied, Truth Bent

• Kristi Noem, then DHS Secretary, oversaw the operation defying the injunction. The DOJ’s handling included misleading the court.

• Revelations from DOJ attorney Erez Ruveni indicated then-acting Deputy DOJ Emil Bovey instructed lawyers to "tell judges to go f themselves," an attitude exposed during later Senate hearings.

Notable Hearing Exchange (07:14-08:44)

Senator: "Did you suggest, as Mr. Reuveni wrote, that DOJ would need to consider telling the courts 'f-you' and ignore any such order?"
Bovey: "I did not suggest that...At the point of that meeting, there were no court orders to discuss."
Senator: "Well, did you suggest telling the courts 'f-you' in any manner?"
Bovey: "I don't recall."

• Popok comments on the pattern of stonewalling and appeals, calling attention to the Trump-appointed appellate judges who repeatedly blocked contempt findings.

---

3. Judges' Amicus Brief and Judicial Authority

• 174 Judges Unite: A coalition of former federal and state judges, including many high-profile figures, submitted a powerful brief defending the courts’ power to police compliance with their orders.
• En Banc Review: The D.C. Circuit (full 11-judge panel) vacated a previous pro-Trump three-judge decision, agreeing to rehear the case—likely “at least 8 to 3” in favor of a new review (13:44).

"This is a core power and principle of federal judges: to issue orders, investigate violations, and do something about it in terms of sanctions."
— Michael Popok (09:00)

---

4. Definition & Significance of En Banc

• Tutorial: Popok explains that en banc review allows a full appeals court to revisit and potentially overturn a three-judge panel’s decision, especially when core principles are at stake.
• Practical Impact: Oral arguments scheduled for September 29, 2026, with a likely Supreme Court appeal to follow.

---

5. Memorable Moments & Quotes

Kristi Noem’s Public Statement (06:31)

"If you come to our country illegally, this is one of the consequences you could face...You will be removed and you will be prosecuted. But know that this facility is one of the tools in our toolkit that we will use if you commit crimes against the American people."
— Kristi Noem

Judge Ludig on Judicial Independence (15:36)

"Never before in American history has a group of judges, retired or otherwise, ever come together, much less to speak publicly against what they are witnessing with respect to the corruption of the Constitution...There is not a question in the world that the only voices that can be heard today above the din of...partisanship are judges, sitting and retired."
— Judge J. Michael Ludig

---

6. Broader Legal Landscape: Church-State Lawsuit

• Americans United Segment (10:36-12:14):
  • Lawsuit against the USDA for religious proselytization via Easter email, allegedly violating the First Amendment and further illustrating tendencies of executive branch overreach.

---

Important Timestamps

• [02:27] – Introduction to the potential criminal contempt proceedings
• [03:13] – Filing and impact of the 174 judges' amicus brief
• [04:49] – Allegations: DOJ/Noem defying court orders with El Salvador flights
• [06:31] – Kristi Noem's public statement at Seacop Prison
• [07:14 - 08:44] – Senate hearing exchange with Emil Bovey
• [13:44] – D.C. Circuit’s en banc decision and composition
• [15:36] – Judge J. Michael Ludig’s statement on the unprecedented coalition of judges

---

Tone and Language

• Popok’s commentary is urgent, direct, and analytical—blending legal expertise with pointed critique of Trump-era legal tactics.
• The episode features candid, sometimes incredulous exchanges (e.g., the Bovey Senate Q&A), and a sense of relief and vindication over the judiciary’s willingness to stand up for its authority.
• Quotes (especially from Ludig) emphasize the episode’s central theme: the judiciary as a bulwark against governmental lawlessness.

---

Summary Takeaway

This episode of Legal AF delivers a gripping, legally dense update on a rare and consequential case involving contempt proceedings against senior Trump administration officials. With exclusive insight into behind-the-scenes legal maneuvers, Popok highlights the defense of judicial independence led by a broad coalition of former judges and unpacks both the technical legal developments and their broader implications for democracy and the rule of law.

---

Transcript

[Fox 1 Announcer]

This episode is brought to you by Fox 1. Watch all 104 matches of the FIFA World cup live in 4K for just $19.99 a month with 3 days free. Build your own multi view, choose up to three streams and follow player spotlights. Stay on top of every moment with live stats, highlights and instant replays. The FIFA World cup, streaming live on Fox One, offers a subject to change. See fox.com for complete terms and conditions.

[Shingles Awareness Spokesperson]

By the time I hit my 50s, I'd learned a few things, like how family is precious, work can always wait, and 99% of people over 50 already have the virus that causes shingles. Not everyone at risk will develop it, but I did. The painful blistering rash disrupted my life for weeks. Don't learn about your shingles risk the hard way. Talk to your doctor or pharmacist today.

[Shopify Advertiser 1]

Sponsored by GSK Starting a business can seem like a daunting task unless you have a partner like Shopify. They have the tools you need to start and grow your business. From designing a website to marketing to selling and beyond, Shopify can help with everything you need. There's a reason millions of companies like Mattel, Heinz and Allbirds continue to trust and use them. With Shopify on your side, turn your big business idea into Sign up for your $1 per month [e-mail] specialoffer I'm

[Shopify Advertiser 2]

Kiana and I leveled up my business with Shopify. Once I figured out that Shopify was a thing, I never turned back. I can create a site with my eyes closed. Shopify thinks ahead of us, you know, and it thinks about the customer more than anything. Every day I'm thinking about some other new business, but Shopify is doing it to me because it's so easy to use. It's like, I can't stop. I'm addicted.

[Michael Popak]

Start your free [e-mail] I started Ornod

[Shopify Business Owner]

in 2013 and we make bike apparel. The best part of Shopify for me is our ability to run the business as essentially non technical people. We're able to admin everything on the back end, front end, and sell things online easily. If Shopify were a bike accessory, I think it would actually be the bicycle. It's the thing that you do the thing on. We run the business on Shopify. Start your free trial on Shopify.com the

[Michael Popak]

Trump administration, its Department of Justice and Homeland Security may be one step closer to criminal contempt proceedings against them. And when we're talking criminal contempt, somebody's going to jail because of a New ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. An 11 judge panel just said we're going to take a closer look at whether Chief Judge Boasberg, the district court judge, was right or wrong to start and find probable cause of criminal contempt against the Trump administration. And then Director of Homeland Security Kristi Noem. In a decision that was probably 7 to 4, 8 to 3, they are setting a new briefing schedule. Want everybody in their courtroom for an 11 judge panel, full en banc panel to decide this case once and for all subject to the United States Supreme Court. But the, the, the, that's the top line. But what is the prime mover? What moved this case Forward? Former judges, 174 former judges, federal and state, yoked together by our friend J. Michael Ludig, formerly of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. They just filed successfully a motion before Judge WILLIAMS In Miami, 35 federal judges imploring her to reopen her case to find fraud on the court perpetrated by Donald Trump, his lawyers, the Department of Justice and the Treasury Department, which is still pending. And now right on the heels of that, right on time, 174 judges, including many of the same three, 35 have bound together with Judge Ludig to argue to the panel successfully that Judge Boasberg was right, that the inherent power of a federal judge cannot be disturbed. To both issue orders, to issue orders when those orders are violated, to find contempt and to investigate it. I'll investigate it all right here. I might as touch and Legal AF I'm Michael Popak back in my home studio. Glad to be back, everybody, and thank you for being here. Come over to Legal AF YouTube channel. Take a minute. You know what to do. Hit that free subscribe button. We've been following this case from the moment it got filed by our friends

[Americans United Representative]

at the American Civil Liberties Union.

[Michael Popak]

In fact, I'll be, I'll be working on getting League alert for the ACLU to come back on with me to brief our audience about this case. They represented a couple of hundred men who were in the middle of the night, thrown onto airplanes, bound and destined for the torture prison of El Salvador under the command of Department of Homeland Security. The now resigned and, and defamed or embarrassed. Sorry, Kristi Noem. And in fact, when they heard about the planes at one o' clock in the morning, they ran into court and got Judge Boasberg's attention. He set immediate hearings and that's when the contempt started. As Drew Ensign on a lawyer for the Department of Justice, started what's the word for it? Not telling the truth to a federal judge. This is at or around the same time that we know from Erez Ruveni, who was representing the Department of Justice in a case involving Kilmer, Abrego Garcia. He came forward with the revelation that then number two, acting of the Department of Justice, Amel Bovey, now a 3rd Circuit judge, gave them the instruction to tell judges to go f themselves, go f themselves and not comply. This was all going on around the time of Judge Boasberg's proceedings as they

[Americans United Representative]

flew planes in violation of his temporary

[Michael Popak]

restraining order and his preliminary injunction ordering them to turn back. For those that don't remember the Seacop Prison and Kristi Noem's cosplay, here's a

[Kristi Noem]

clip here at CECOT today and visiting this facility. And first of all, I want to thank El Salvador and their president for their partnership with the United States of America to bring our terrorists here and to incarcerate them and have consequences for the violence that they have perpetuated in our communities. I also want everybody to know, if you come to our country illegally, this is one of the consequences you could face. First of all, do not come to our country illegally. You will be removed and you will be prosecuted. But know that this facility is one of the tools in our toolkit that we will use if you commit crimes against the American people.

[Michael Popak]

And then Emil Bovey was asked about telling federal judges to go F themselves in his confirmation hearing here. Who could forget this exchange?

[Senator]

Let me ask you, since you are under oath in the complaint, it says Beauvais stated that DOJ would need to consider telling the courts you and ignoring any such court order. Did you say anything of that kind in the meeting,

[Emil Bovey]

Senator? I have no recollection of saying anything of that kind to the extent I usually don't.

[Senator]

You recall, Mr. Bove, if you said or suggested during a meeting with Justice Department lawyers that maybe they should consider telling the court you. It seems to me that would be something you'd remember. Unless that's the kind of thing you say frequently.

[Emil Bovey]

Well, I've certainly said things encouraging litigators at the Department to. To fight hard for valid positions that we have to take in defense.

[Senator]

And have you frequently suggested that they say you and ignore court orders? Is that also something you frequently do, such you might not remember doing it in this occasion?

[Emil Bovey]

No. And as I explained, I have never directed.

[Senator]

So did you or did you not make those comments during that meeting?

[Emil Bovey]

Which comment, Senator?

[Senator]

You really need me to repeat it? Did you suggest, as Mr. Reuveni wrote, that DOJ would need to consider telling the courts you and ignore any such court order.

[Emil Bovey]

I did not suggest that there would be any need to consider ignoring court orders. At the point of that meeting, there were no court orders to discuss.

[Senator]

Well, did you suggest telling the courts you in any manner?

[Emil Bovey]

I don't recall.

[Senator]

You just don't remember that.

[Michael Popak]

Now we've got Judge Boasberg because last year, around April of 2025, we did the reporting that the judge found probable cause to believe that criminal contempt had been had been perpetrated in his courtroom and eventually figured out it was probably Kristi Noem and ordered her to testify. And so began the appeal odyssey. It went up to the appellate court not once but twice. A Trump dominated appellate panel with Katzis and rao, Judge Katz and Judge Rail. Judge Rail, by the way, trying out hard to be on the United States Supreme Court. It's our audition. Always rules for Trump and against democracy and against the rule of law. While they block Judge Boasberg's criminal contempt order and his and his fact finding grinds to a halt. Then, then it kind of gets restarted and then it dies again with all these various appeals. And then you've got the 174 former judges, state and federal, filing an amicus brief reminding the panel, reminding the en banc panel, all 11 active judges, that this is a core power and principle of federal judges to be able to not only issue orders, but to investigate where there have been violations of that order and to do something about it in terms of sanctions. In a minute I'll read to you from their or their, their memorandum of law that was so powerful that it opened the eyes of the en bang panel. And at least six out of the 11 said, we're going to take a look at it again. We have an important message to share

[Americans United Representative]

from our friends at Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The Trump administration's excessive Christian nationalist rhetoric is only building as we move toward the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. AU is highlighting a case involving federal workers caught in the crossfire. A multi faith group of federal employees filed a new lawsuit against the U.S. department of Agriculture for violating the separation of church and state and the religious freedom promised in our Constitution. Americans United received emails from multiple USDA employees saying the proselytizing Easter email sent by Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins to

[Michael Popak]

more than 100,000 USDA employees is an

[Americans United Representative]

abuse of power that violates the separation of church and state promised in the first amendment. They are absolutely right. Government employees signed up to work for the usda, not attend Brooke Rollins's Sunday service. The Constitution draws a bright line between personal faith and government power and this lawsuit says she trampled right over it. Well, the hits keep on coming from this administration and Americans United is doing their best to keep up the fight against Christian nationalism.

[Michael Popak]

If you want to help, head to au.org legalaf to learn more about their

[Americans United Representative]

work and how you can get involved. Americans United supporting everyone's right to live as they choose, so long as they don't harm others. That's AU.org legal A F here's a

[Michael Popak]

quick tutorial of what en banc means and it's done differently in different places. But in this particular court, in a federal court as a last gasp you as the losing end of an appeal can ask for the not just the three judge panel that was originally assigned because all appeals are generally decided by by three judge panels randomly assigned. You can say throw out that decision, vacate that decision, overrule it and I want the entire appellate panel to rule on my case because I think that group got it wrong. That's effectively what this new order that I'll post in Legal a substack for you says which is the three judge panel Trump, Katz, Trump Rao and Judge Walker who is a Democrat appointed who was in dissent. They got the two one got it wrong. Now you got to show that they got it wrong. You got to then get the majority of the active duty non senior status judges in your district to agree and they did so of these judges, Chief Judge Srinivasan, Judge Henderson, Millet, Pollard, Wilkins, Katzis, Ray, Walker, Childs, Pan and Garcia. You got three Trumpers there. Katz's rail Walker. My gut is it was at least 8 to 3 to overturn the lower panels decision by Katzen Rao and let's take another look and do it again. And then their decision finally rendered after oral argument and full briefing will be the decision in the case of that the losing party will take up to the United States Supreme Court because you know that's where this is heading. But I wanted to focus first on the order and then a very interesting observation by Chief by Judge Ludig who put this group together that I wanted you to hear. The order says upon consideration of the petition for rehearing on banc and the

[Americans United Representative]

responses the unopposed motion for for invitation

[Michael Popak]

to participate as a michi Cure I by 174 former judges that means nobody objected. They looked at the brief and then they had the vote on en banc and a majority of the judges eligible to participate voted for an en banc hearing, ordered that the motion for the 174 judges is granted. It is further ordered this case will be reheard. They then took the order of the appellate panel on April 14, 2026 and threw it out. Kept the stay in place. So they're not gonna, they're not going to, you know, start sanctioning Donald Trump and the Department of Justice and Homeland Security just yet, although it's getting close. And then they want oral argument on September 29th with briefing throughout the summer. And we'll do a live stream with my commentary on on Legal AF YouTube channel. Now let me play you a clip from Judge Ludig in which he says emphatically, the only group of people in America who can save democracy in the rule of law are former judges being heard in court over the din of politics. Play the clip.

[Judge J. Michael Ludig]

Never before in American history has a group of judges, retired or otherwise, ever come together, much less to speak publicly against what they are witnessing in the United States of America with respect to the corruption of the Constitution and the rule of law in this country. I could not be any prouder of this group of judges. Two or three hundred former federal and state judges have come together over the past year and a half, enthusiastic and willing to be heard collectively as that group on many of the issues that are facing America today. Extraordinarily unprecedented, and this is why they have done it. There is not a question in the world that the only voices that can be heard today above the den of the political, you know, partisanship, are judges, sitting active judges, and even retired judges. They are the only people in this country, Michael, who can save America today. And these judges, both active and retired, are prepared to honor their oaths in trying to save America.

[Michael Popak]

Well, that sound you hear is a collective sigh of relief from our audience. I'm glad you're here. These cases are important. That's why we curate them for you. Take a minute. Hit the free subscribe button here and on legal AF YouTube channel. And to read all of the filings in this case that are important. Come over to Legal AF substack for a for paid members to read our Legal AF file filings. We call it Filings af. Until my next report, this is Michael Popak.

[Legal AF Substack Host]

Can't get your fill of Legal af.

[Americans United Representative]

Me neither.

[Legal AF Substack Host]

That's why we formed the Legal AF sub stack. Every time we mention something in a hot take, whether it's a court filing or a oral argument. Come over to the substack. You'll find the court filing and the oral argument there, including a daily roundup that I do called, wait for it Morning af. What else? All the other contributors from Legal A

[Michael Popak]

for there as well.

[Legal AF Substack Host]

We got some reporting, we got interviews, we got AD free versions of the podcast and hot takes where Legal AF on substack. Come over now to free subscribe.